Fighting Revolution

by THOR NEUREITER

[ analysis ] As the Islamic Republic prepares to celebrate its anniversary next month, similarities between the current turmoil and the one that led to a successful revolution 31 years ago continue to increase. Perhaps this is most evident in Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's seeming attempts to use lessons from the galvanizing moments of the Islamic Revolution to employ defensive tactics against the Green Movement.

The galvanizing moment for the Revolution referred to in several news reports occurred after Grand Ayatollah Shariatmadari called for all Iranians to observe arba 'een for those killed at the hands of the Shah's police forces during protests in Qom on January 7, 1978. Those protests were in response to slanderous allegations from the Shah that included implicating Ayatollah Khomeini as being both a drunkard and a servant to the British.

Observances took place across Iran and in Tabriz, the home of Shariatmadari, anti-government protests formed, drawing the deadly attention of police forces. The government's heavy handedness began a cycle that continued into the summer of arba 'een with the suppression of protesters by the Shah's police force.

In the past two weeks a similar trend appears to have taken place. Beginning with the tactical reactions to anti-government rallies that coincided with the mourning of Grand Ayatollah Montazeri, and culminating with massive crackdowns across Iran during demonstrations on Ashura, the Khamenei regime appears to have taken notice and acted accordingly.

The current crackdowns appear to be focused on what the Shah failed to foresee in 1978. After the protests in Qom during Grand Ayatollah Montazeri observance, the government reportedly banned all additional memorial services for Montazeri outside of Qom for the seventh day of mourning. This decision implies the government's understanding that Montazeri's popularity and message could spark a growing unified movement. It also mobilized security and forces and the Basij in advance of the day of Ashura.

This willingness to politicize one of the holiest days of the year with tactics that resemble martial law may have been more of a mistake than proactive maneuvering. Instead of deterring protests with its brute force, many believe the government may have inadvertently provoked a new fearless face within the opposition. The surprising retaliation of demonstrators to the security forces may have signaled a shift in the Green Movement.

The Islamic Revolution truly evolved from a rebellion in the late summer of 1978 when two important events occurred following the bloodshed of the first half of that year. As it became evident that Khomeini and his xenophobic message were unifying Iranians in a way political opposition leaders and the more moderate Ayatollahs could not, protests grew in size and intensity. The Shah reacted again with an extreme show of force, which became the first monumental event, the Black Friday massacre.

Khomeini's call for strikes as a sign of protest to the killings, and the crippling economic effects those strikes created, provoked the Shah to call for Khomeini's expulsion from Iraq. The expulsion to Paris from Najaf was the second and final event to solidify the Islamic Revolution.

From Paris, Khomeini now had a very loud megaphone with new access to Western media. The Shah, unlike Khamenei today, underestimated the power of the media for an opposition movement. The Khamenei regime's effort to limit communication has been well documented and reported over the past six months, but new tactics are surfacing, mainly activities tied to mosques with sympathetic views of the Green Movement.

The death of Seyed Ali Mousavi is a key example of the government's attempt to suppress mourning as a rallying point. Government officials took the body of the murdered nephew of opposition leader Hossein Mousavi immediately, as they claim for identification purposes, for what was widely seen as ploy to delay his funeral. It has been reported that tear gas was fired into a group of mourners who gathered at the hospital where his body was being held.

As drastic and incomprehensible a tactic this may be, it could indicate a defining tactic or miscalculation on the part of the Khamenei regime as Seyed Ali was buried in a small quiet ceremony according to the demands of government authorities.

The Shah greatly underestimated the power of the people during his rule. The elements of the Islamic Revolution brewed and simmered during a decade of oil riches that never reached the working and middle classes. The movement grew and suffered greatly at the hands of the SAVAK and the Shah's police forces.

By changing the names in the previous paragraph, it could easily define what is happening today. Analysis of these two periods of time shows many parallels on both sides of the confrontations, but the growing similarities that the Islamic Republic's leadership shares with its former foe is the most revealing.

Khamenei apparently has taken notice of the Shah's failure to move offensively to confront an opposition movement. But by making such bold and deadly decisions, he and his regime also show the same out-of-touch tendencies towards a great portion of the Iranian people that ultimately led the demise of the Shah.

Thor Neureiter is a filmmaker based in Brooklyn. He has worked on several documentaries for PBS Frontline, including "Showdown with Iran."

25 Comments

I read your comment and i have to agree with you to some extend. However there is one big diffrence, while in the 1978 the people was unifided under Kohomines umbrella today it is diffrent. Today there is no clear leader. The Green movment in Iran today does not have one leader. People are split what they want.

I belive the best solution for the Iranian people is if Khamenei pulls out and we have a new re election. However i found this highly unlikly, because what i fear is that we might end up with a civil war.

Essa / January 5, 2010 8:49 PM

I would actually emphasize the many differences, over the few similarities. Use of police without issued firearms versus conscripts with assault rifles. Unarmed police cars versus tanks. Restrictions on mourning ceremonies versus waning restrictions. Inability of movement to generate any form of effective strike versus paralyzing strikes. Control over the military versus waning control over an effective one. Basically a student movement with a hodgepodge collection of political opposition versus the 1979 type coalition of the mosque, bazaaris, intellectuals, leftists (MKO, Fedayeen, Tudeh etc), urban middle-classes and the conservative rural masses (sucessfully co-opted by the Khomeni’s Islamists). One notorious and highly disliked intelligence service versus very loyal and effective overlapping intelligence services and widespread system of quasi-military organizations like the veterans Bonyads (foundations) that provide services to a wide segment of Iranian lower social classes...

I could go on, but you probably now see my point.

Hey, has anyone seen the new anti-Green movement videos now popping up on YouTube? They're fairly well produced:

IRANIANS UNANIMOUSLY REJECT THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC. WE WANT A SECULAR DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT 'FOR THE PEOPLE OF IRAN'. WE WANT THE MULLAHS AND THEIR EVIL ESTABLISHMENT OUT OF OUR COUNTRY. THE WORLD MUST STAND UP IN SUPPORT OF FREEDOM FOR THE PEOPLE OF IRAN. WE DESERVE BETTER. WE WANT TO BE FREE. FREE.

IRAN / January 5, 2010 9:20 PM

While there are similarities, but there are also differences between 1978-79 and the current events.

The Shah's regime was reluctant to use force and did not use deadly force against peaceful demonstrations. Situation changed when elements of MKO and Marxist groups used weapons and attacked the army, forcing it to shoot at the demonstrators.

The Shah left, realizing that he no longer had a popular base and left the government to Dr. Bakhtiar, who was a key opposition figure and a Dr. Mossadegh Cabinet member.

Most casualties occurred when Air Force Homafars and some people gained access to arms and engaged Imperial Guards. Unarmed military personnel were killed in their barracks, after the generals had declared neutrality and had ordered them back to barracks.

The Islamist regime has no problem with using deadly force and executing the opposition. They justify it on religious grounds. There are no key major opposition figures. The revolt has a much wider base and leadership.

If we agree that the term revolution implies a rapid forward looking social, political and economical change, then the correct terminology for 1979 event would be a COUNTER REVOLUTION.

Maziar Irani / January 5, 2010 10:44 PM

Maziar,

Wow...you are way off on your take on Shah's actions against peaceful demonstrations.

Did you even attend the 1978 demonstrations or have you just read about them?

I was there and my friends and I were shot at by the army soldiers in the streets. There were no armed MKO and leftist members among us. If there were, they constituted such a small number that no one noticed them. The army carriers full of armed soldiers were chasing us down streets. We had no weapons not even a stick.

We all want to fight against IRI's atrocities, but there is no need to revise history in order to justify the current struggle.

We got rid of one dictator but unfortunately since we did not have the political maturity, khomeini was able to pull the blinders over most Iranians and establish his own dictatorship.

Now we need to continue to increase the political maturity of all Iranians so that when the right time comes we replace this dictatorship with a solid democracy.

Bahman / January 6, 2010 3:23 AM

Maziar Irani,
We should not forget the role of PLO in 1979. Yasser Arafat did not come to Iran to visit with Khomeini for milk and cookies. He came to collect for his services.
Just days after Khomeini came to power in Iran, Arafat himself was boasting of how the “PLO trained Iranians" and how they provided Khomeini and his followers with Kalashnikovs as well as Palestinian volunteers.
It was these same Palestinian volunteers who continued to support the Mullahs by taking charge of the security in the ministries and the other public buildings as well as killings. Soon after the initial executions Yasser Arafat and Khomeini were congratulating and hugging each other.

And what did the Palestinians get in return for their services? Amongst other thing$$$$,they got a Palestinian embassy in Tehran and a branch office for the PLO in Khozestan and the unconditional support $$$.
They murdered our people and got paid for it and yet during Iran/Iraq war Arafat quickly turned his back on Iranians in favor of his Arab brother Saddam Hussein.

Iranians know too well the victory day is not too far when these mass murderers stand before the nation and the world to answer for their crimes in the 31 years.

Manoochehr / January 6, 2010 3:52 AM

"If we agree that the term revolution implies a rapid forward looking social, political and economical change"

I don't agree. I prefer Websters definition. Your definition is slanted to prejudge the direction. A counter revolution is when a revolution has occurred an attempt is made to return to the first government.

Websters definition:

a fundamental change in political organization; especially : the overthrow or renunciation of one government or ruler and the substitution of another by the governed

Steve / January 6, 2010 4:35 AM

@Pirouz

I see you are posting your Islamic Republic garbage propaganda yet again.

You're such a joke - do you believe anyone takes any of your postings seriously?

Agha Irani / January 6, 2010 4:41 AM

I cannot see how & why any Iranian reading the views of some of the monarchist here would ever want to exchange the current bunch of fanatics for another. What do they have to offer Iran apart from their arrogance & self righteousness & constant attempt to rewrite history. But no wonder, for are they not friends to the neocons and the zionists.

rezvan / January 6, 2010 2:17 PM

"The Shah greatly underestimated the power of the people during his rule"

The Shah greatly under underestimated the stupidity of people to follow a ruthless Akhond Khomeini. The Shah was surrounded by bunch of traitors such as Fardoost and Ghrabaghi, etc. etc.

Anonymous / January 6, 2010 8:21 PM

rezvan-who are you trying to kidding?
It is quite clear to everyone here you are a supporter of the Islamic Republic. Unlike many of the Islamic Republic supporters who put on a secular and democratic face here and pretend they post from Tehran and speak on behalf of the Iranian people, you have been honest about your position. You even refer to Khamenei and Islamic Republic as ordained. I don't agree with you, but respect your opinion.
However, leave out the part about rewriting the history please. Ever since the beginning of the revolution IR has done nothing but try to rewrite history through phony reproductions, mass media (inside & outside) and their lobbies in various different countries. L.A., U.S.A. where most of you people reside is a prime example. So please for your own sake, don't even go there.
What have the monarchists asked for except a chance for everyone's participation in a national referendum on a decision to choose the government and the leader(s) of their choice? Are you afraid of freedom of choice?
Let's put the neocons and zionists rhetoric aside. It is cliché and irrelevant. Open your eyes and look at the streets of Iran. There is your answer.

Manoochehr / January 6, 2010 9:09 PM

hopefully the victory day for the regime becomes the victory day for GREEN MOVEMENT.

Faraz Amiralaei / January 7, 2010 3:04 AM

Those 3 videos are so hypocritical that they're almost funny. They show pictures of broken car windows yet they forget to mention that it was the basijis who broke those windows.

DC / January 8, 2010 1:20 AM

Bahman,

Your story seem to be bunch of lies. My father was an officer in Imperial Guards. He testified that he or his colleges never opened fire on demonstrators. In fact, the soldiers were not even allowed to shoot for self-defense and had to get 3 levels of clearance form high command before even shooting in the air. At the end of the shift, every morning, they had to give exact accounting and justification for every missing/used bullet (so much for comparing the two security forces as Pirouz has). But he did witness with his own eyes how palestinian-style guerrillas shot at the soldiers and people to promote confrontation among the two.

It is worth mentioning that many of his colleagues were executed without trials for crimes they did not commit. Their families were even prevented from visiting the grave. Many were practicing Moslems that originally supported the revolution. All the families were offered, years later, was an apology letter for hasted and unjust executions.

Kia / January 8, 2010 2:24 AM

Pirouz **** **** [sorry GooGoo, we shouldn't publish his name] has been spending a lot of time on Iranian sites spreading IRI propaganda. Makes you wonder who employs him.

GooGoo / January 8, 2010 3:12 AM

Manoochehr:

Who are YOU trying to kid? There is a massive democratic uprising at a grassroots level in Iran which you and your monarchist cronies have no problem piggybacking. Yet when the majority of those in pursuit of democratic reforms in Iran voice the widely held opinion that NO ONE is asking for a return to monarchy, you accuse them of secretly being IRI supporters. One would think the fact that they openly voice their opposition to the IRI, as well as support democratic reform, is evidence enough of their dislike for Khamenei but the monarchists again seem to have missed the logic train. You are engaging in cheap smear politics.

We all understand that you shah groupies still have a bone to pick with the intellectuals, secularists, and leftists; it angers you to this day that these individuals played an instrumental role in overthrowing your beloved dictator in 1979. But it is again this same EDUCATED segment of society giving hope to the Iranian nation that another corrupt and unpopular government can be changed. When it comes to the valiant opposition of educated liberals to the IRI, you monarchists openly support them, albeit in a very superficial sense. But when it comes to their democratic objectives, you attempt to discredit/insult them. The opposition suddenly becomes "Islamists putting on a secular face." A brave leader like Mousavi who has put his life on the line for his beliefs suddenly gets judged based on regime actions 30 years ago and lingering monarchist resentment over his involvement in overthrowing the shah; his role as the foremost leader, voice and founder of the Green Movement is conveniently ignored, not to mention his numerous statements espousing his goals for reforming Iran into a representative democracy as well as his open opposition to the establishment. You repeatedly say things like "L.A., U.S.A. where most of you people reside" in a futile attempt to portray the majority of the diaspora as being out of touch with the reality in Iran. Quite ironic considering Los Angeles is and has been the bastion of monarchists since the revolution; every Persian New Year, the large population of shah groupies in Westwood erects a billboard on the corner of Santa Monica Blvd and Sepulveda in honor of the shah. Very relevant image for Persian New Year: a dead dictator overthrown by a popular revolution over 30 years ago. It doesn't get more out of touch than that!

And in regards to rewriting history, monarchists are in absolutely no position to speak. On countless occasions, we have seen your unpopular group on message boards like this unabashedly making light of and outright denying the numerous well-documented shortcomings and crimes of the Pahlavi dictatorship. You say things like "Ever since the beginning of the revolution IR has done nothing but try to rewrite history..." You somehow fail to notice that no one is denying the enormity of the IRI's crimes. This is precisely WHY we are fighting to reform the existing order and bring about a genuine democracy in Iran. But two wrongs don't make a right. All of the atrocities of the shah's regime are historically well-documented and it is pathetic that you attempt to deflect the issue EVERY time it is brought up. Both the IRI and the shah were corrupt and committed many crimes. Both are widely unpopular. BOTH are wrong.

By the way, Reza Pahlavi's very close ties to the neocons and Zionist groups is hardly "rhetoric" or "cliche and irrelevant" as you so eloquently put it. At the very least, you are grossly misinformed or in denial. At worst, you are a bold-faced liar ruthlessly pushing your monarchist agenda. Anyone can do a quick Google search on "Reza Pahlavi" and groups like "AIPAC", "WINEP", or "JINSA" to see the facts for themselves. His close associations with these groups and hard-line hawks such as John Bolton make Reza Pahlavi a very untrustworthy individual. These are the very same organizations and politicos who concocted the toppling of Iraq's government in collaboration with an out of touch exile by the name of Ahmed Chalabi. We all saw how that turned out. In case you don't know about Chalabi, do another Google search. The power of FACTS is amazing. You may actually learn something. This is precisely why we cannot take your suggestions for a "national referendum" seriously. Your small unpopular group is not interested in doing what the people of Iran want. You just want a counter-revolution to bring back the failed dictatorship of yester-year. Contrary to all of your claims and posturing, it is the monarchists who put on a "secular and democratic face" but in reality wish to exchange one despotic form government for another one. Your preferred government may very well be secular but it is NOT a democracy. And please do away with all of the talk about a "constitutional monarchy." Reza Pahlavi's questionable associations alone cast significant doubt on the prospect of him ruling in a ceremonial post. Let's not forget that his father, your beloved dictator, was legally supposed to rule as a constitutional monarch as well. This was according to Iran's own constitution at the time! But with backing and support from subversive American elements as well as the security apparatus of the U.S. and Israel, we saw how "just" and "democratic" his rule was.

You finished your post with a very interesting statement that has been repeated in one form or another by monarchists in regards to the Green Movement: "Open your eyes and look at the streets of Iran." Are you implying that Iranians are getting killed in the streets for Reza Pahlavi? Perhaps you should heed your own advice. Do you see anyone risking life and limb in Iran demonstrating in favor of reinstating the monarchy? The brave Iranians who face bullets and batons in the streets are fighting for a secular democracy, independent judiciary, women's rights etc. The few remaining monarchists are the last of a dying breed and Reza Pahlavi is their Ahmed Chalabi. An out of touch exile with a chip on his shoulder over his father being taken to task over his failures. I know your lot sees a glimmer of hope that this may be your chance for revenge and a way to ruin Iran in the manner you see fit. But you are wrong. Iranians will settle for nothing less than a true democracy. And if an independently monitored & truly fair national referendum takes place, secular democracy will win resoundingly while theocracy and ANY FORM of monarchy will get a firm slap in the face by the wide majority of Iranians. There is YOUR answer.

Mirza Kuchak / January 8, 2010 4:01 AM

It is interesting that anyone defending the Revolution is automatically accused of being on the IRI's payroll. Pro-revolution demonstrators are portrayed as being bussed in and forced to march or alternatively as simpletons drawn by the certainty of a hot meal.

How utterly pathetic and revealing of the green supporters that they delude themselves into believing that the IRI lacks popular support. These greens are not a serious movement at all; the sum total of their strategy is to hijack important dates, hit the streets and create anarchy.

Samuel / January 8, 2010 6:42 AM

It is interesting that anyone defending the Revolution is automatically accused of being on the IRI's payroll. Pro-revolution demonstrators are portrayed as being bussed in and forced to march or alternatively as simpletons drawn by the certainty of a hot meal.

How utterly pathetic and revealing of the green supporters that they delude themselves into believing that the IRI lacks popular support. These greens are not a serious movement at all; the sum total of their strategy is to hijack important dates, hit the streets and create anarchy.

Samuel / January 8, 2010 6:50 AM

Mirza Kuchak,

I could not agree with you more. Long Live Free Iran. These Mullahs and Reza Pahlavi will have the same faith at the end.

Arash e Kamngir / January 8, 2010 7:21 PM

Mirza Kuchak says,"Who are YOU trying to kid? There is a massive democratic uprising at a grassroots level in Iran which you and your monarchist cronies have no problem piggybacking."

We are? Didn't know it. You are simply amazing. You know us better than ourselves.Mind read, do you?

Mirza Kuchack says,"We all understand that you shah groupies still have a bone to pick with the intellectuals, secularists, and leftists; it angers you to this day that these individuals played an instrumental role in overthrowing your beloved dictator in 1979."

The last 31 years have proven the world who your so called intellectuals, secularists, and leftists are indeed. We don't even have to respond.Their track record speaks for itself.

Mirza Kuchack says,"A brave leader like Mousavi who has put his life on the line for his beliefs suddenly gets judged based on regime actions 30 years ago."

We believe you mean ...regime's actions for the last 30 years. Yes, he has been part of the regime for the last 30 years and one of the leading characters for that matter. Consequently responsible for his own deeds within the system.

Mirza Kuchack says,"You say things like "Ever since the beginning of the revolution IR has done nothing but try to rewrite history..." You somehow fail to notice that no one is denying the enormity of the IRI's crimes. This is precisely WHY we are fighting to reform the existing order and bring about a genuine democracy in Iran."

Well, it seems to us we are in total agreement.

Mirza Kuchack says,"All of the atrocities of the shah's regime are historically well-documented and it is pathetic that you attempt to deflect the issue EVERY time it is brought up. Both the IRI and the shah were corrupt and committed many crimes. Both are widely unpopular. BOTH are wrong."

Deflect what? Regadless of who writes the supposed facts that you are referring to then the question is, why would IRI try to rewrite the history or have their front men trash the past?If they are well documented and unquestionable?Their action clearly reflects where the truth lies.

Mirza Kuchack says,"Reza Pahlavi's very close ties to the neocons and Zionist groups is hardly "rhetoric" or "cliché and irrelevant" as you so eloquently put it. At the very least, you are grossly misinformed or in denial."

Don't know. Neither RP nor neocans, Zionists have called us on this matter. Mousavi has been a part of a recognized terrorist government. Are we to blame the man personally? No. We should judge him for his own deeds. Neocons ran U.S. for 8 years. Zionists are active in various fronts.RP or Mousavi function within establishments that may have undesirable components.But, life has to go on and struggle for freedom can not be stopped.Americans voted the neocons out.RP talks to democrats today. RP has to talk to everyone and he does.U.K., France, Germany.... What is the problem? He has talked to Israelis on many occasions to try change their minds on military action against IRI.

Mirza Kuchack says,"Anyone can do a quick Google search on "Reza Pahlavi" and groups like "AIPAC", "WINEP", or "JINSA" to see the facts for themselves."

Please do. These group may view their interests parallel with anything other than IRI.They talk to RP and RP talks back, like any good politician who cares about his country.We are sure elements of IRI have talked to "AIPAC", "WINEP", or "JINSA" at various different times.That is not an indication of a love affair among them.IRI just recently talked to Americans and Israelis in Egypt. Are we to believe Khamenei is a Zionist now? Far from it. RP is not an exception.

Mirza Kuchack says,"Your preferred government may very well be secular but it is NOT a democracy. And please do away with all of the talk about a "constitutional monarchy." Reza Pahlavi's questionable associations alone cast significant doubt on the prospect of him ruling in a ceremonial post. Let's not forget that his father, your beloved dictator, was legally supposed to rule as a constitutional monarch as well."

What government? We do not have one yet.Do away with what? That is your opinion about RP. O.K. But it is not ours. Most of us have not experienced his father and the last time we looked he died some 30 years ago.We are talking about a system of government of our choice for the future of Iran under the guide lines of a parliamentary system run by people's representatives where the monarch's role is well defined as a symbol of unity in a traditional and diverse country such as ours.

Mirza Kuchack says,"You finished your post with a very interesting statement that has been repeated in one form or another by monarchists in regards to the Green Movement: "Open your eyes and look at the streets of Iran." Are you implying that Iranians are getting killed in the streets for Reza Pahlavi?"

No, We are implying the Green movement is indeed a grassroot movement for true democracy. dēmokratia, ‘rule of the people’or a government based on the majority vote of 'all' citizens.Since we are citizens of that country too and obviously unknown to you have the support of a good number of people within Iran, we believe in a free referendum on the day after the Islamic Republic when the citizens of Iran should have a chance to vote on a system of government of their choosing to lead Iran in the 21st century and beyond. If you feel Mousavi is your man and IRI is the government of your choice, fine.Because Mousavi has not denounced IRI.
Let's put it to a national referendum.

We owe it to the future generations of our country to once and for all close this chapter of name calling, finger pointing and irresponsible accusations.

If you feel so strongly about your position then power to you. We are sure Republicans as well as supporters of the left and others feel stronly too. What is the problem?

IRANIAN PEOPLE BEFORE THE ENTIRE WORLD IN AN ALL INCLUSIVE NATIONAL REFERENDUM CAN DECIDE ON A GOVERNMENT OF THEIR CHOICE FOLLOWED BY ELECTION OF THEIR DESIRED REPRESENTATIVES IN THE GOVERNMENT OF THEIR CHOICE.LET PEOPLE DECIDE.

Mirza Kuchack says,"And if an independently monitored & truly fair national referendum takes place, secular democracy will win resoundingly while theocracy and ANY FORM of monarchy will get a firm slap in the face by the wide majority of Iranians. There is YOUR answer."

Thank you for your kind thoughts, but no slap or torture is necessary in civilized societies.

We wish you the best.

Manoochehr / January 8, 2010 11:10 PM

Yes Samuel, why else would one defend the IR if not on the payroll?! Are you saying you are not on the payroll?! If not, you got the short end of the stick!!!

Kia / January 9, 2010 1:41 AM

Yes Kia I am on the payroll, they pay me in kabob and cake everyday. Keep believing those interesting fantasies.

Samuel / January 10, 2010 12:52 AM

@Samuel
What are you defending?
The death of thousands of Iranians exectued after show trials (or no trials) at the hands of the revolutionaries. (and still continuing to this day)

Taking diplomats hostage which is against international law and has harmed Iran for 30 years?

Dragging on the futile war with Iraq for an extra 6 years at the cost of hundreds of thousands of Iranian lives after the Iraqis were expelled from Iran?

The decline in the Iranian economy (oil production is still not at pre-revolution levels)

The greater restriction in peoples freedoms?

I'd really like to know what these backward thugs have done for Iran

Agha Irani / January 12, 2010 4:42 AM

@ samuel & Pirouz,
Even though I've no doubt about Pro-IRI demonstrations being all staged and paid for still I believe any one with an once of common sense will have no difficulties realizing how phony these pro-Gov. demonstrations are.
If a pro-life group starts a demonstration in front of an abortion clinic you will see an immediate gathering of pro-choice group (no matter how small the #s) on the other side of the street to counter their effort.
Same should apply to these so called pro-Gov. gatherings, these show of support for IRI were NOT "spontaneous", last 1 took 3 days to take place. Why is that? Of course! that was the time for your beloved regime to stage the Demos., Just look at the uniformity and exact similarities of the banners, pix, flags and slogans these people were carrying. Never mind majority looked military age anyway.
I don't want to bore the viewers by getting into free sandwiches, water & soda bottles, free metro and bus rides and allowed to take paid day of from their Gov. works along with complete protection provided by regime's military, police, basij and plaincloth infrastructures.